“I call it a thought virus, because really what they want to do is they just want to replicate their way of thinking to other people.”

—-

Len Pozner

=====

Definition of a thought virus:

“majority illusion, where many people appear to believe something ….which makes that thing more credible.”

—–

Clayton A. Davis at Indiana University

==================

“Nature has planted in our minds an insatiable longing to see the truth.”

—

Cicero

=================

“Book store owners and record store owners used to be oracles, in that way; you’d go in this dusty old place and they might point you toward something that would change your life.

All that’s gone.”

———-

Tom Waits

===========

Boy oh boy.

If there is one insatiable desire the entire 7 billion people on this earth of ours shares, it would be for truth.

Let’s just say … from that point on it is all downhill for truth.

Let me tell you what I am going to tell you.

There is an enemy in this story — the thought virus.

There is an unexpected doctor in this story — the future librarian.

============

“This is the look of the truth: layered and elusive.”

—-

Anne Carson

============

That said.

I have written dozens of times about the challenges Truth faces in today’s world.

I have also written several times, in rebuttal to the overall dismay & despair & hand wringing of the older generations, that I believe the younger generations will solve this. They will solve it because they will find a lack of truth certainty untenable and … well … do what generations do – innovate a solution to an existing issue.

The issue, to me, is fairly simple to articulate <and I don’t think I am the sharpest knife in the drawer>. To articulate it I go to the 80/20 rule.

In the past we were presented with a fact, or a truth <which is most typically a coalescing of facts> and we accepted it was most likely 80% true … and that was good enough. We figured the 20% wouldn’t change the core truth. That 20% also permitted us some space for unlearning or some adaptability to absorb an additional fact to course correct our thinking. But that factoid, because it was mentally residing in the 20%, needed some gravitas to shift the 80%. That 20% also gave some room for the doubters and conspiracy theorists and misguided contrarians to dabble.

In today’s world truth has flipped … we are presented with a fact, or a truth <which is most typically a coalescing of facts> and we accept it is most likely 20% true … and then we rummage around in the 80% <if we are curious> to coalesce some additional things <some facts and some conjecture>.

But, suffice it to say, a shitload of people wander around on a daily basis having beliefs grounded in a 20% fact foundation. This means they either quadruple down on their 20% <to create the 80% in their heads> or they are constantly unsure of what is truth and hat is not being buffeted about by the winds of whatever information is in the air that day.

This shift damns truth to a wretched game of truth or consequences because truth demands a certain amount of certainty – which we have ceded in today’s world.

Regardless.

Let me offer two words to everyone – information literacy.

I believe it is a commonly used term within the hallowed halls of librarianism <in other words … librarians use the term a lot>.

============

Information Literacy

Information literacy is a crucial skill in the pursuit of knowledge. It involves recognizing when information is needed and being able to efficiently locate, accurately evaluate, effectively use, and clearly communicate information in various formats. It refers to the ability to navigate the rapidly growing information environment, which encompasses an increasing number of information suppliers as well as the amount supplied, and includes bodies of professional literature, popular media, libraries, the Internet, and much more. Increasingly, information is available in unfiltered formats, raising questions about its authenticity, validity, and reliability. This abundance of information is of little help to those who have not learned how to use it effectively.

To become lifelong learners, we need to know not just how to learn, but how to teach ourselves. We must acquire the skills necessary to be independent, self-directed learners.

———–

Derived from the Association of College and Research Libraries’ Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education

====================

Information literacy is the superweapon to permit truth to battle on the field of doubts, lies and conspiracies.

I also believe we will create a new career in our battle over truth – information literacists. Let’s call them our future librarian superheroes <information literacists>.

=============

“We don’t become better because we acquire new information. We become better because we acquire better loves. We don’t become what we know. Education is a process of love formation. When you go to a school, it should offer you new things to love. “

—

David Brooks

==============

Look.

We talk a lot about how bookstores have suffered and libraries have suffered but they are just places of learning and, in my eyes, we should be focused on deliverers of knowledge <which enables the learning>.

I would love future librarians to be ‘book slingers’ but I think their future specialness resides in information literacy <”truth” as it were>.

And that, my friends, is the future librarian.

The one who steps into the library and offers us the rediscovery of specialness.

Specialness?

I believe libraries should be less about the books and more about a place for the mind. My gut tells me they will need to wrestle that mantle away from the perceived ‘place of the mind’ – the internet. This shouldn’t be that difficult. The internet does NOT have a monopoly on knowledge … it has a monopoly on information. Some good information, some bad information, some false information and some true information. In today’s world there is no “judge.”

And while I would shift the character f the library to more of a place of congregation combining coffee shop, book exchange, art gallery, museum and … well … enlightened conflict <human exchange of ideas> I think the library of the future needs “information therapists” who engage in mind therapy.

Superheroes of the mind lording over information libraries.

I see libraries as havens of truth self-improvement.

I see libraries as islands of shared intellectual heritage.

I see libraries as raucous spaces of learning reverence.

I see libraries as arenas where all are victors in the battle for truth.

Libraries need to find a new reason for existing, a new role and a new way of working and I believe the librarian is the catalyst for the makeover.

Frankly, we do need superheroes and less “community gathering places.”

I am not opposed to community but … geez … truth desperately needs bold superheroes and not revered spaces of whispered knowledge among few.

I feel strongly about this because … well … 3 things.

My sister is an ‘information literacist.’ I have seen the power of librarians up close & personal. For years we have seen them as quiet servants of books behind some desk and now they should be encouraged to step forward and champion not just books, and literature, but knowledge. In fact … I would begin recruiting those who DO want to actively engage.

If not them, then who?

Society, led by some fairly vocal ‘truth benders’, are leading the charge against truth by standing up and basically saying nothing we say means anything, we’ll do what we want to do and tell you what truth is afterwards. I say that because books, and knowledge, cannot fight unless someone holds them forth as the torch is held forth on the statue of liberty. Truth, whether we like it or not, demands hand-to-hand combat. I believe we need superheroes on the side of truth.

Truth, more often than not, is complex. Philosophically, truth is simply the idea that ‘facts’, viewed from a human perspective, end up being nuanced and create a complex multidimensional slightly flawed diamond. Not everyone can handle truth … it most likely demands superheroes.

To be clear.

I don’t believe we should be sending these new superhero librarians out without some allies and tools.

Personally I believe we <including me>, who care about communicating truth and having truth reestablished, need to go back to the drawing board with regard to ‘learning’ and unlearning and … well … reintroducing truth to society.

I also believe Google should be stepping up to the plate.

===================

<about Google> This is the equivalent of going into a library and asking a librarian about Judaism and being handed 10 books of hate

—–

Danny Sullivan

===========================

Google needs to get their ‘truth compass’ heads out of their asses and start thinking about some technology voodoo they can create, and implement, that assists in filtering out ‘the fake.’

Ah.

Fake.

‘Fake news’ is nothing more than purposeful disinformation using some actual fake-information – this is a thought virus.

Fake news is NOT opinions.

Fake news, or disinformation, is often information disseminated as ‘whole fact’ and, yet, it is a splinter <at best> of a fact.

Fake news is deliberately false and misleading information published in social media and elsewhere online.

But fake news … at its core … is about lies and lying.

But fake news … at its core … resides in some alternative universe where what you & I know <and is basic corroborated truth> does not exist. It doesn’t even have a heartbeat in that universe.

In that universe its citizens discard the usual rules of evidence flippantly dismissing actual eyewitness testimony as lies, actual confessions of someone who was guilty are waved away as ‘they said what they had to say’ and documented information is scoffed at as flawed, paid for by some elite cabal, some academia gibberish … or a simple forgery.

In this alternative universe real information, truth as it were, is simply what someone believes <sometimes under the guise of common sense> … and they conflate “believe” with “know.”

======================

“Of course, disinformation,” Quinn said. “I can do that.

I’ll leave out critical events, then I’ll put in false information and twist everything that has happened around into a vague, shadowy history that obscures what really took place.”

―

Terry Goodkind

============

This alternative universe ends up being created from some complex combination of lies & truth which are undermining the very idea of facts, history and truth. In fact, they turn truth and facts on their heads therefore making any evidence of the actual truth & reality bogus <in this alternative universe> … uhm … which means nothing can be proven and truth becomes … uhm … “thoughtful opinions.” Ultimately this creates that 80% doubt which swallows up the facts & truth like quicksand. In that quicksand facts become a conspiracy, a legend, a hoax, or some active effort to circumvent truth.

In other words … In this bizarre world truth becomes lies and lies become truth.

While this seems bizarre, it is dangerous:

============

“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.”

——

Hannah Arendt

===========

I say all of this long thought piece to state – this is a problem which demands a superhero.

I say all this long thought piece to state that these new librarian superheroes, our doctors against thought viruses, needs to be a defined career. It needs a career path, training and … well … I guess certifications or degrees or some shit like that.

Why?

It is suprising tricky to debunk and compete against “fake.” It is surprisingly <and disturbingly> incredibly difficult to debate with a liar. You would think that you could simply point out what is a lie … but it is not easy when dealing with a good liar. Yeah. There are ‘good liars.’

They justify what they say by saying “but its true” and defending the fraction of the whole they used against the more truthful ‘whole story.’ They thrive in the 80% doubt & uncertainty space in the information literacy world.

By the way … this 80% ‘uncertain truth world’ has been in the works for a while <it has just found some influential enablers of ate>:

————————-

This has been a long time coming. Edelman, the world’s largest public relations firm and my previous employer, issues an annual study into the state of trust around the world. Over the past few years that study has pointed to a clear trend: the erosion of trust in authority figures and the rise of trust in “people like me.” We called that the inversion of the pyramid of influence. It means that your neighbor is just as much a source of insightful analysis on the nuances of U.S. foreign policy towards Iran as regional scholars, arms control experts, or journalists covering the State Department.

————————

And maybe that is my point on the librarian superheroes and thought viruses … the inversion of the pyramid of influence. If that is true <and I believe it to be so> the battle for truth almost demands a new type of expert that people can actually trust. We need truth to be championed by someone other than “Joe my neighbor,”

Anyway.

Like any good <bad> virus … it is here to stay and a motherfucker to kill.

Truth is too important to let the current battle be fought without some superheroes on its side. The truth is the axis munid, the dead center of the earth … when it’s out of place nothing is right; everyone is in the wrong place.

Society, and our future, demands librarians to venture out from behind the desk and becoe information literacy superheroes.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

That’s just what I think.

But I have to tell you a truth … truth is getting the living shit kicked out of it in today’s world and we better come up with a solution soon , therefore, my idea is as good as anything out there yet.

================

“The person who pretends to not see the truth is committing something much worse than a mortal sin, which can only ruin one’s soul – but instead committing us all to lifetimes of pain.

The truth is not just something we bring to light to amuse ourselves; the truth is the axis munid, the dead center of the earth. When it’s out of place nothing is right; everyone is in the wrong place; no light can penetrate. Happiness evades us and we spread pain and misery wherever we go. Each person, above all others, has an obligation to recognize the truth and stand by it.”

In my personal writing I can honestly say I have never posted something unedited.

Even the easiest things I have written get tightened up, edited and revised as I reread. Sometimes not much … but everything gets tweaked – some a little … some a lot.

Even then … typos remain.

Now.

In my professional life I use outlines, drafts and finals.

I do this because my mind is always at work.

I hear things, read things & see things and all the while my mind is juggling all of this stimulus rethinking, rewriting and recreating.

By the way … this acknowledges that I could, on occasion, run into some aspects of unintended plagiarism.

But because I am an ‘editor of things’ this means I am comfortable rearranging things. In fact … I never get tired of rearranging let alone thinking. I would do it 24/7 if I didn’t have to sleep.

However.

Doing all of this without any purpose or objective is simply mental masturbation.

That’s why the three draft rule is a good one.

The first draft is all about you, what you think and how you want to say things.

The second draft smooths out the edges and insures the personal “you” is getting in the way of clear communication and truth.

The third draft insures whatever YOU want to say connects with what THEY need to hear, want to hear and should hear.

It is a mistake to reverse this order. Reversing the order strips the presenter of any passion and creativity … it becomes more of an “order taker” type presentation or document.

Anyway.

The other thing people say about drafts is that each one eliminates so that the last one is the ‘brevity’ version.

I don’t agree <in general>.

The three draft method is actually more like an hour glass.

The first draft is almost always too long and … well … too.

The second draft tends to peel shit off of what you have.

The third draft more often puts some meat back on the bones tied to the reader/audience.

A lot of people, simplistically, balk at this. They don’t see the meat as useful and abhor adding things at this stage.

Once again, I disagree.

I disagree because I typically think of Claude Hopkins, a man who pioneered the concept of advertising as we know it, in 1923 <“Scientific Advertising” is a worthwhile read with worthwhile advice applicable even in today’s world>.

If Hopkins was known for one thing it would be “persuasion.” Everything centered on that. Not brevity or pictures versus words or any of that bullshit we waste time pontificating over these days … just persuasion and doing whatever is necessary to persuade.

For example.

With a prospect standing before a salesperson, would you confine him to any certain number of words? That would be an unthinkable handicap.

Successful writing almost always depends on maintaining perspective – keep in mind no one really reads what you write for amusement <but that doesn’t mean you cannot amuse on occasion>.

Consider them as prospects standing before you, seeking for information.

Give them enough to get action.

Some advocate large type and big headlines. Yet no one likes salespeople who talk only in loud voices.

We should measure everything we do by salespeople standards not by amusement standards. Ads are not written to entertain. When they do, those entertainment seekers are little likely to be the people whom you want. That is one of the greatest advertising faults. Ad writers abandon their parts. You can never forget you are salespeople, not a performer.

Seek a sale, not applause.

Regardless.

All presentations really can get boiled down into 3 important aspects:

Figure out what you want to sell <persuade people to think or do>

Figure out what you want to say

Figure out how you want to say it

All the other mumbo jumbo on ‘tricks to effective presenting’ is irrelevant if you don’t figure out these two things. In fact, I would argue you could throw away all the presentation books if you figure these two things out.

What you want to say sounds simple but it is not. Because inevitably you get caught up in ALL the things you want to say, prioritizing what you want to say and getting what you want to say down on paper <or whatever format you elect to organize the presentation>.

All I can say for sure is that you need to put it in a draft, a document or a script. Without it you cannot edit. And without editing <unless you are Bill Clinton> you are screwed.

Next.

Figuring out how you want to say it.

Okay. Let me tell you a truth, a fact, a ‘something no one really wants to hear.’

99% of the time what you just figured out to say will sound like crap if you just read it as a presentation.

Maybe 99.9% of the time. Writing & speaking are two different skills. They may be derivatives of each other but one typically does not translate directly to the other.

There will always be presenters who are obviously reading their presentation script off a teleprompter <which is a skill in itself by the way> and it sounds obviously stilted and in some cases like it was the first time they had heard these words out loud.

And the issue wasn’t because they were reading a script <another complaint young people throw around when arguing they want to be ‘natural’ when presenting>. It was the script they were reading. They wrote something that sounded good in their head when they read it … but sounded stupid when actually saying it. By the way … that is why rehearsing is important.

All the things I am going to type drive me crazy, but maybe this one the most.

These are the ‘rules’ like … you cannot stand still, or you have to move, or you can’t have your hands in your pockets, or … well … just go ahead and pick up a ‘how to’ presentation book … they will list all the ‘don’t rules’.

Nuts.

I just say ‘nuts’ to that.

I have stood with hands in my pockets just stepping up to the microphone and delivered. No one cared I wasn’t using my hands.

Why?

Because they were listening to what I had to say. As a generalization … all the ‘how to present’ rules are stupid. If you have something good to say, and you say it in a compelling, believable, likeable way, the rest of the stuff just gets in the way. It’s all about the message. If you know, and like, your message just deliver it in as comfortable a ‘behavior’ style you want.

Nuts to all the book rules.

– Forced passion

This one drives me nuts too. It’s kind of like speaking with exclamation points hoping the exclamation points travel through the ether between you and your audience and pricks them in the ass to make them stand up and yell “hell yeah!”

Some people shout.

Some people create sentences which they purposefully amplify the end.

Some people shake a fist, or pound a table or make some ‘exclamatory’ gesture just so everyone knows they are passionate about whatever they are talking about.

Sometimes they don’t really want to do this shit but someone suggests “show them you are passionate” and … well … the wheels start to fall of the good presentation wagon.

Why?

It’s all forced.

And it’s a shame because most presenters are actually passionate about something related to their topic <assuming you do the three draft method – me, edit, reader – in that order>. And they don’t need to be overt to communicate it. They just need to share their passion in whatever way they exude it.

I have been extremely passionate on a topic … and all I did was talk. I said how she felt and what I believed. And you know what? People believed me. they may not have been persuaded … but they believed what I had to say.

Here is the bottom line. If you care, it will show. You need not tell someone you are passionate. In fact … here you go … a rule.

Never say in a presentation, meeting or discussion … “I am passionate about ‘x’.”

Prove it without ever saying it.

– Forced relevance <or forced theme>

I almost split this into two but they are just two sides of the same coin. In an attempt to make their topic relevant to either the audience or the environment <you can choose either> a presenter can go to some fairly absurd lengths.

They can use a joke which isn’t really relevant until you explain why.

Well, let me say this, 99% of the time if you are using a joke or come up with some forced relevance it means you are working too hard. Go back to the simple first aspect and think about what it is you want to say. If it isn’t compelling or understandable, a joke or forced metaphor or forced semi-topical linkage isn’t going to help.

In fact it can hurt.

How?

Because it is extraneous. And extraneous things and activity tugs the audience away from what you really want them to remember and say. I don’t usually get aggravated over this one instead I just get frustrated that the speaker doesn’t trust the topic is interesting enough, and it can be presented interestingly enough, to simply present it.

Lastly.

If I want to connect with the reader/listener with my last draft I have to put the screws down on the persuasion aspect.

And I would suggest you think about this slightly differently than many people talk about it – think about the fact what you are saying has to meet some price/value equation.

Simplistically … this is about alignment.

And, no, this isn’t about ‘first impressions’ because a presentation is a compilation/summary of impressions.

We all know this <but I will remind you anyway> … we are evaluating things all the time.

And even if we recognize that we are evaluating <like in viewing a presentation> we still don’t even recognize much of the evaluation that takes place because much of it is actually usually automatic, subconscious.

There has been a boatload of research done on evaluation which I will not bore you with … but will share a cliff notes summary of key points:

=====================

This process of evaluation can be broken down into the rising and falling of two perceptions: Perceived Cost and Perceived Benefit. To be clear, the cost of something is not just money. Cost is the receipt of something negative or the release of something positive whereas Benefit is the release of something negative or the receipt of something positive.

Any time a value presentation is made, be it a candy bar in the checkout rack at a grocery store, a pair of earrings online, or a proposal to marry, there is an initial phase when you open your mind “file cabinet” and pull the “folder” associated with whatever value is being presented. As you open this folder, certain things will jump out at you, influencing your initial perceived cost and benefit of the value presented. What is in that folder, what items you pull first, and how much each item affects you depends on two things:

Your history with the value presented

How it is initially presented

It’s also important to note here that the point at which a visitor makes a commitment to the transaction is not the same point at which they complete the transaction. The time between the commitment and the transaction should be as short and simple as possible. The more complex and time-consuming it is, the more chance the frustration of the transaction process or the “cold feet” effect could keep it from happening.

==============

Look.

Like it or not … even our presentations are being evaluated through this wacky thing called heuristics.

Pricing/value cues abound within presentations … believability cues abound within presentations … persuasion cues abound within a presentation … and you have to be aware that they will scream at the top of their lungs even if you aren’t looking at them.

Why do I say that?

You can even be silent and be giving a price or value cue.

For example.

Bach was a master of ‘negative space’ … building masterful musical combinations … he also used silences that are as eloquent and thought provoking as notes, tempo and syncopation.

<I used Bach because I tend to believe most of us who have built a presentation kind of feel like a composer>.

By the way.

While you may be thinking I am only discussing big important presentations which have been rehearsed and rehearsed … but this discussion actually pertains to almost any size of any draft or communications.

In the end.

Value is kind of like … well … the world and life

In fact … it reminds me of something I read:

=================

“The world is not as simple as we like to make it out to be. The outlines are often vague and it’s the details that count.

Nothing is really truly black or white and bad can be a disguise for good or beauty … and vice versa without one necessarily excluding the other.

Someone can both love and betray the object of its love … without diminishing the reality of the true feelings and value.

Life and business <whether we like to admit it or not> is an uncertain adventure in a diffuse landscape whose borders are constantly shifting where all frontiers are artificial <therefore unique is basically artificial in its inevitable obseletion> where at any moment everything can either end only to begin again … or finish suddenly forever … like an unexpected blow from an axe.

Where the only absolute, coherent, indisputable and definitive reality … is death. We have such little time when you look at Life … a tiny lightning flash between two eternal nights.

Everything has to do with everything else.

Life is a succession of events that link with each other whether we want them to or not.”

——–

Arturo Perez Revarte

===============

That all may be too poetic in discussing something like giving presentations, communications, creating drafts and persuasion … but simply put … “everything has to do with everything else.”

“It’s one of those dumb days where nothing’s really wrong but nothing’s really right either and the sky can’t even choose to be white or gray.”

–

Andrea Portes

=====================================

“Nothing” days.

Its hard to believe with all that shit we always seem to have to do and all the shit that seems to be happening around us and all the shit society, people and culture claims we are demanded to pay attention to … there can be nothing days.

The dumb days in which nothing happens <albeit lots of somethings actually happen>.

I think this is one of those things I didn’t think about until I actually thought about it — how can a day be nothing when you actually did a shitload?

Sure.

There are some people who get busy doing nothing <I actually call this ‘the art of looking busy’ and have a piece on his coming up>.

But the majority of us do a shitload of something on the days which we tend to view as having done nothing.

And I am not sure that is particularly healthy.

You can surely assess what you have done and apply some value less than what you wished you could assess … but even that “lesser value” is not zero, therefore, it is not nothing.

Personally I think this happens because the majority of us have a natural resistance to nothing. What I mean by that is being associated with “nothing”, particularly in a country that extols doing, creates some sense of diminishing or diminished.

And no one likes to feel either diminished or having whatever we actually did do be diminished to … well … nothing.

Anyway.

What that means is we will apologize for ‘nothing’ with a variety of reasons – distracted, bored, tired, etc. – because in the end our internal integrity compass wants to point toward something to make us happy.

In fact … someone created something called the Nothing Day which has been commemorated since 1973. The day is literally about doing nothing at all. There is absolutely no purpose or intended structure for this pointless celebration.

My point isn’t that we should celebrate nothing or doing nothing or even the feeling we actually did nothing but rather that we see “nothing” where there really is something.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

This is even making my head hurt.

Let me try this.

Far too often we fall into an all or nothing assessment with regard to our day. What that means is we could actually do a shitload but if it doesn’t meet some “something” standard it then falls to a 100% nothing value.

That is nuts.

==============

“Either I reigned supreme or sank into the abyss.”

–

Simone de Beauvoir

==============

And I can honestly say its nuts because I do it. I can reach the end of a day with a long list of shit I have done and sit back and say “shit, I did nothing.”

And I don’t think I am that different than a lot of people.

I could speculate why we do it but I will not.

Mostly it is because we think, think & think about the shit … and overthink it … and it is a death trap.

Mostly I think society & culture seems to put an extraordinary amount of value on tangible recognizable outcomes therefore if you just do shit … but the shit doesn’t offer some trophy outcome you can hold up for everyone to see than … well … we think we have nothing to show for it. That is also a death trap.

That’s dumb.

Not only is that dumb it is the foundation for one of those dumb days where nothing’s really wrong but nothing’s really right either and the sky can’t even choose to be white or gray type feeling … which is a pretty dumb feeling to have.

All I can say is that the next time you think it is one of those dumb days where you did nothing … maybe stop overthinking and make it a simple thought — I did some shit today. I will do more shit tomorrow. And eventually some good shit will happen.

“And this I believe: that the free, exploring mind of the individual human is the most valuable thing in the world. And this I would fight for: the freedom of the mind to take any direction it wishes, undirected.

And this I must fight against: any idea, religion, or government which limits or destroys the individual.

This is what I am and what I am about.”

——

John Steinbeck

=============

“when you follow two separate chains of thought you will find some point of intersection which should approximate to the truth.

–

Sherlock Holmes

========================

“Once to every person and nation come the moment to decide. In the conflict of truth with falsehood, for the good or evil side.”

—-

James Russell Lowell

============

“It takes courage to lead a life. Any life.”

—–

Erica Jong

================

Well.

Booing someone rather than debating is cowardly. It’s cowardly because that means you, not them, does not have the courage to defend your idea and thinking.

Okay.

Maybe cowardly is too harsh. It is definitely lazy and often cloaked in a multi layered cloth of frustration, anger & emotion.

Suffice it to say … both debating & thinking takes some courage in that it forces you to face some things that maybe you do not want to face <and change how and what you think>.

But debating takes even more courage because ideas, when let out into the open, are pretty helpless. They cannot live without some protection. This means whether you feel courageous or not, whether you feel competent in expressing your ideas let alone defending your ideas, you step up to the plate and take some swings.

The cowardly way is to simply sit back and enjoy the comfort of the unsaid opinion & idea.

Okay.

It is even more cowardly to simply boo or shout down someone who not only wants to share their thinking & ideas but one who is willing to listen, debate & discuss your ideas and thinking.

It is even slightly cowardly to simply rely on ‘groupthink’ <which, by the way, is different than being a sheep and following the crowd>.

Anyway.

I had the fortune to go to graduate school with a case study driven curriculum.

We didn’t follow some syllabus with textbooks and lesson plans … we debated business cases. We quickly learned that cause & effect is rare, solutions are rarely simple and that “one right answer” was the rarest animal of all.

But this was learned by listening and debating and discussing <with some random shouting included>.

We quickly discovered that the glib one-liners <or tweets> actually made little ripple on the surface of the discussion.

Words were demanded by the idea itself to ‘lead’. That means you were demanded to deliver words being in front of your idea, pointing to a direction, saying ‘this way’ and using words to step out into the unknown of a debate in which you knew, at best, your idea was but one of the ‘right answers & solutions.’

You find out quickly … too quickly in fact … theory, it seems, is always easier than practice.

And that is what an idea that remains in your head unspoken is … simply a theory.

If it cannot stand the gauntlet of debate & discussion it remains simply a theory <or opinion> you have and will never go into practice. I believe it was Harry Eckstein <Case Study and Theory in Political Science 1975> who stated that case studies “are valuable at all stages of the theory-building process, but most valuable at that stage of theory building where least value is generally attached to them: the stage at which candidate theories are tested.”

=======

“Censorship is an almost irresistible impulse when you know you are right.

But when we look back at all that used to be seen as the truth, we know that we must keep a free market of ideas open.

The best test of truth is the ability to get accepted in the market.”

–

Oliver Wendell Holmes Supreme Court Justice

==============

Freedom of the mind to go in any direction is one of the greatest gifts humankind has been given.

Booing is actually the cowardly form of censorship of ideas … a lazy way of curbing the freedom of the mind.

And, maybe worse, booing someone is a cowardly way of actually caging the mind from exploring new directions.

I will admit.

Booing and shouting someone down and not listening seems weird to me. Weird in that half the battle in Life is simply showing up. So you have shown up <which puts you ahead of a shitload of people> and then you choose to simply show dissatisfaction and offer no solutions … or listen to offered solutions.

Yeah.

I know what I am suggesting isn’t always easy. And that is where courage steps in.

Freedom of mind means leaving what you think behind for a while. It doesn’t mean you can’t ‘come home’ again … but

We live in a weird world these days … alternatively dominated by groupthink and, alternatively, individual opinions are as important as facts, it is a weird world in which feelings seem more important that facts.

In this weird world of ours it is becoming almost impossible to stand against what feels like and inevitable tide and when you do try you can expect a strong wave of cynicism, sarcasm & … well … screaming.

In this weird world of ours if you truly do think for yourself and break free of the herd to think independently about a subject of great importance to you and to the greater world you are demanded to do something other than ‘boo’ or show up and shout.

Okay.

That last one isn’t weird.

In fact.

It is what normal people do with good normal ideas when they disagree with someone who has an idea you may not agree with.

Regardless.

I imagine it takes some moral courage to not just boo. And you have to have some courage to understand that it is less important whether you are right or wrong … what matters is that you stand up and challenged what you most likely see as misguided institutionalized groupthink.

=====================

“I realize that if you ask people to account for facts they usually spend more time finding reasons for them than finding out whether they are true.

They skip over facts but carefully deduce inferences.

They normally begin thus: “how does this come about?”

But does it so?

That is what they ought to be asking.”

–

Montaigne

===============

Sigh.

So.

I don’t agree with many things going in in the world today and I certainly don’t agree with many things the Trump administration is suggesting they will do.

But if I am going to express my discomfort in their ideas I want to hear their discomfort in my ideas. And while I am under no illusion that we will end up comfortable in some place … I do find comfort in the belief the discourse is more likely to produce a good result then simply shouting or booing.

=================

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.

John F. Kennedy

=============

Look.

I love the fact that people are showing up and speaking out.

And I absolutely understand that many of us are scared to have the debate & discussion because we fear losing that discussion and there is a shitload at risk.

And I absolutely understand that “there are few things more destructive than an unsound idea persuasively expressed” <Bill Bernbach>.

So you know what?

Keep showing up.

Keep expressing your discomfort with ideas you are hearing.

But find a spokesperson.

Find someone you trust to express your ideas & your thinking better than you can. And have that person open the debate. Words matter and words used well matter.

Shouting is not only cowardly but, even worse, it cheats words from being able to matter.

Shouting and booing is almost as destructive to a good idea as silence.

Please.

Please stop shouting.

Please.

Please stop booing.

Please.

Please stop not … well … not talking.

The only way out of the weird place it seems like the world is in these days is to talk our way out of it <and beget some doing we can agree on>.

Booing & shouting is not only not productive it is only going to hurt our ears as it only echoes in the hole we are all in … and doesn’t offer us any way out of the fucking hole.

The only way out of any hole is to embrace our god-given gift of the freedom of the mind to take any direction it wishes, undirected.

Mr. Trump, who does not use email, also advised people to avoid computers when dealing with delicate material. “It’s very important, if you have something really important, write it out and have it delivered by courier, the old-fashioned way, because I’ll tell you what, no computer is safe,” Mr. Trump said.

“I don’t care what they say, no computer is safe,” he added. “I have a boy who’s 10 years old; he can do anything with a computer. You want something to really go without detection, write it out and have it sent by courier.”

=======

Christ almighty.

I am an old fart but Trump makes me sound like a frickin’ technologically savvy millennial.

So.

We are going back to Pony Express? <good for the horse breeding business>

Snail mail? <that’s one way of making the post office profitable again>

Overnight delivery? <does he have stock in FedEx and UPS?>

Faxes? <who the hell makes those machines and does anyone still have one around?>

Bike couriers? <great for the American bike manufacturing business … and Big Wheels … bring them back>

This is nuts.

This guy is nuts.

He is just a nutty old guy yelling at the clouds.

There are times I actually think this crazy motherfucker wants to go back in time and resurrect ‘the way things used to be’ because … well … he actually thinks it WAS better and we CAN go backwards.

What a nutcase.

And just as I read this new Trump craziness I was finishing up a piece where ‘Finnish schools phase out handwriting classes.’

<clarification: The Finns are phasing out cursive writing classes, not writing classes. They will all of course all still learn to write.>

Thank God Trump isn’t the president of Finland or he would fire the person who made this decision.

But Finland is smartly dropping some writing classes in favor of keyboard skills classes <kind of recognizing the changing methods of communication — which someone should tell Mr. President Elect Trump>.

Finland is one of the first countries to stop making cursive handwriting classes compulsory. This is a government policy and government decision.

Apparently their country & its elected officials have come to terms with the fact that texting, tapping and tweeting have taken over as the primary means of communication in the modern age.

====

“Children don’t have time to become fast at cursive writing, so it’s not useful for them.”

Minna Harmanen <Finland’s National Board of Education>

=====

Uhm.

They want students to use their time learning by concentrating more on what they wrote rather than how they write it <kind of a useful thought, isn’t it?>.

Beginning in 2016 Finland students were taught only print handwriting and spent more time learning keyboard skills.

====

“… something we recognise is very important for the job market.”

Harmanen

=====

Finland is one of the first countries to stop making cursive handwriting classes compulsory, but the change is part of a global move away from handwritten documents towards digital communication. A recent British survey found a third of respondents had not written anything “properly” by hand in the previous six months and in the US several states have removed cursive writing classes from the curriculum.

I, personally, will mourn the loss of cursive writing <albeit I cannot remember the last time I did it> because, when used, it showcases personality and the ‘human touch’.

I do know some neuroscientists will mourn its loss because they believe cursive handwriting improves brain development, motor skills, self-control and even addresses dyslexia.

This is true enough that some French education officials reintroduced cursive writing classes in 2000 after a brief hiatus.

<note: I, personally, would find new technique to generate the same benefits rather than go backwards to a less-than-time-efficient learning method>

But time moves on and we should be encouraging the development of daily skills which enhance the effectiveness & efficiency of one’s Life <professionally & personally>.

And while Mr. President Elect Trump continues to look at the problems of today as either unsolvable or solvable by going backwards <despite the fact he has a big brains and knows a lot of big words> most other people look at all of this as ‘progress’ and the ‘cost of progressing.’

====

“We’ve hardly had any comments about the move from parents … a few of the grandparents were upset, but everyone else seems fine.”

—-

Finland Educator

====

This is the kind of change thinking which helps students thrive in school <because it more aligns with what they see & do in everyday Life> and beyond <it establishes some basic skill levels for a professional career>.

Do I believe pencils will become extinct?

Well.

No.

But they will surely be relegated to specialty usage at some point.

While it pains me to say I would agree that having beautiful handwriting is less relevant now <and maybe we could use that teaching time to grammar & critical thinking> but the ability to write quickly will always be needed in some form or fashion.

Writing will not go away.

But it is typing skills which are truly essential in today’s world <I know I suffer from not having particularly good typing skills>.

I am a business consultant and I still use notebooks for taking notes and use pencils.

It is not that I am averse to computers or see the value in their efficiency … but writing and notebooks is aligned with how I think. It allows me to do corrections, add diagrams and sketches, draw out random thoughts <which inevitably take on different iterations as I listen> and permits me to easily refer back to other points with notes and annotations much more easily than if I am doing it via computer.

I am a better thinker this way and I offer better thoughts to people who pay me this way.

But, unlike Trump, I do not want everyone to do it like I do it. What I want is for people to do things in a way and a method which enables them to be their best in terms of thinking & doing. And, frankly, I don’t care how it is done.

What I do know is that I have some peers who use computers quite effectively <replicating what I do>.

What I do know is that I see some younger less experienced people who use computers quite effectively <replicating what I do>.

What I do know is that there is an entire generation, as well as an entire field of experts, who would suggest not using computers and email because it is ‘not safe’ and ‘you never know’ is … well … crazy if not stupid.

You would think that a business person like Trump would understand that everything comes with a risk <if everyone couriered all secrets don’t you think someone would crack that nut?> and that progress sometimes leads safety & security <but it eventually catches up>.

Progress is like the military’s salient entry into enemy’s territory. You go as far and as quickly as you can … knowing at some point you need to buttress up your rear and protect your flanks.

There are a shitload of things that are changing in our world because of technology and the trappings that come along with the technology.

This depth & breadth of change is … well … maybe not scary … but it can make you a little nervous on occasion.

Regardless.

I get trapped by Trump sometimes within what I believe are some rather overblown reactions combined with bombastic hyperbole combined with … well … an old guy who doesn’t know what the hell he is talking about <if his 10 year old son is his primary learning point we are all in trouble>.

What I do know is that my life spans the introduction of the internet <pre, during and now post fall out>.

I can say one thing for sure … I never thought I would wish I had paid more attention to typing class and being able to type properly when I was at school.

I have watched at how business operations have changed. I have watched how time now gets viewed quite differently – where overnight delivery was a deadline and a time constraint … we now can email one minute before a deadline. I have watched how everything personal has become public. And if anyone thinks this is solely about email security and computer hacking they are nuts. Privacy has become a concept that has been squeezed into such a small box that I am not sure anyone can ever keep a secret in today’s world.

Look.

Going back to cursive writing.

I will admit, personally, I find this news slightly depressing … or maybe it just makes me a little sad.

I understand writing will not go away.

And I also understand that there will always be someone who will master the art of cursive writing <even young people>.

And I certainly understand that every generation will find and create and embody writing skills different than mine and my generation <but … to make a point … Shakespeare wouldn’t recognize anything I wrote>. However, I would note that today’s young people writings <what they write not how they write it> are thoughtful and probably sharper than anything we ever wrote at that age.

And while I think the education system is slowly catching up I would suggest more often than not what the young is writing <not how they wrote it> is being honed not by classroom instruction but rather by a jury of peers who don’t hesitate to call bullshit the moment they see it.

And that leaves me a good place to end.

Pencils will never become extinct <just used less>.

Computers will never go away <and will be used more for more things>.

And I call bullshit on “if it’s very important, if you have something really important, write it out and have it delivered by courier, the old-fashioned way, because I’ll tell you what, no computer is safe.”

That is an old out of touch man not recognizing that all progress has some risks.

That is an old out of touch man not recognizing the possibilities that progress

The Original Fearless Leader

offers and how there is always someone out there, most likely not an old out of touch man, who can solve this problem rather than avoid the problem.

I admit.

Sometimes listening to Mr. President Elect Trump makes me think of old man yelling at clouds … and it makes me sad to think our young vivacious energetic country has an old man with old thinking leading it <said from an old man>.

Just be sure your advertising is saying something with substance, something that will inform and serve the consumer, and be sure you’re saying it like it’s never been said before.”

=

David Ogilvy

———————

“If you try to comprehend air before breathing it, you will die.”

=

Mark Nepo

—————

“Seeking truth is a full time job. Communicating truth is a purpose in Life.

Embrace that truth and your Life will be significantly more complicated, but significantly more rewarding.”

=

Bruce McTague

——————–

Well.

Communicating has always been a tough gig but in today’s world it has taken on an increased challenge.

I scan headlines in magazines and online and I cannot see one topic being discussed, one industry or any one group of influential type people that isn’t under attack by ‘lack of trust’ or, in other words, ‘liars.’

What that means is anything you are communicating isn’t starting from a commodity standpoint <all facts and truths are created equal> but rather you are already in a hole trying to climb out of ‘prove to me this is not a lie.’

Truth has never had a more difficult challenge than today. This may sound odd because common sense suggests truth is truth and, unvarnished, stands clear of any and all clutter as … well … truth.

Unfortunately that is not … well … true.

Truth, more often than not, is a wallflower and not the one breakdancing in the middle of the room. The schlub doing the crazy dance alone, being watched by everyone, is more likely a lie or a semi/partial truth. You have to coax truth to the dance floor. Someone has to bring it out into the audience and permit it to be seen.

Truth telling is hard work. It is not for the faint of heart. Seeking truth is a full time job <which most people, frankly, just do not have the time to do as they do their paid full time job>. And communicating truth has to be a purpose in one’s life in order to meet the onslaught of untruths, purposeful ignorance, unintended ignorance, semi-truths and … well … cynicism.

To be clear.

I do not believe we are in some ‘post truth world.’ Nor do I believe what someone said “there are no facts anymore.”

Facts are facts and truth is truth.

There may be some confusion around this but … of all industries … advertising and marketing communications people had sure as shit better be fucking clear on this … or they are in deep shit.

Anyone in the professional communications business had better be absolutely fucking clear that communicating today ain’t like communicating yesterday … or they are in deep shit.

While I believe business, in general, benefits if they start on day one embracing the thought they are in the decommoditization business <rather than in the ‘uniqueness business’> I believe communications would benefit by embracing the thought they are in the ‘establishing truths’ business.

Look <part 1>.

Advertising, marketing and all of professional communications is in a challenging position. Challenging in that businesses spend money on marketing & advertising most typically to sell shit. Therefore its main goal is to … well … sell shit.

This means that if I represent a product and its main buying audience is white, male & blue collar <or pick any demographically based segment> … I am going to use imagery and words that will appeal to them <sometimes to the detriment to other audiences who are less likely to buy your shit>.

Now.

Of course you want to do it with style and substance and some sense of responsibility <not be stupid>. So any advertising person with any chops <any good> will figure out a way of not doing the stupid shit to sell shit. Even then … your audience is your audience and while we would like to suggest everything is made to be created with a larger purpose of ‘bettering the world’ … to a business who only has maybe $1000 to market something <or some finite budget amount> that $1000 is spent on selling shit and not ‘bettering the world.’

Simplistically … you sell to the people who will buy or have bought.

Simplistically … you sell to those people who will buy in the most effective way so that they will actually buy.

I say that because someone on the outside looking in can take apart imagery & words and make some very valid points with regard to the kinds of messages they send … but marketing people & advertising people are under a lot of pressure to sell shit. And, remember, they are in the service business … they ultimately do not do anything but ‘strategically create persuasive creations’… and a business makes the decision on whether what they create will actually be produced and put in front of people. And here is where the communications folk can get a little sideways. They focus on imagery & words & ‘attention’ with the intent to gain interest … not specifically sell shit. And they ignore truth as … well … too complicated & too complex. And it is quite possible we communications folk may have gotten away with that in the past, but in today’s world, sure as shit, you better be grounded in hard, clear truth or you are gonna get screwed.

Look <part 2>.

In the good ole days … truth was appreciated, but aspirational sold.

Well.

That was before we all got a good dose of cynicism and started drinking from the fountain of untruths.

Messages are everywhere and simply suggesting you were offering truth because “you’re too clever to fall for manipulation” gave people permission to at least think you were offering truth.

No more my friends.

While aspirational drives value, lack of truth suffocates value into nothingness. This doesn’t mean there will not be a boatload of products and services who make a sale standing on the superficial surface of irrelevant, but appealing, value. But that will be the geography populated by the hacks.

This truth thing may not be a battle which some people want to fight. And that is okay. But someone has to or the entire industry will become … well … irrelevant. If no one tells the truth then why would I listen to anyone.

I, personally, am not suggesting ditching aspirational but I am suggesting that truth, communicating the truth in a away that people actually believe it is true, is the key to future success.

Look <part 3>

I have worked in and out of the marketing and advertising business for <yikes> over 30 years so I feel like I have some qualifications to comment on the industry. Everyone on the outside of the advertising business looking in thinks those creating the advertising think about shit that … well … truthfully … advertising people actually never waste their time thinking about.

And everyone inside the advertising business thinks about more shit than people outside the advertising could ever imagine they think about.

Suffice it to say I could gather up examples of advertising using material over 20 years and make pretty much any point I want to make – good, bad, absurd, true, untrue, semitruthful, smart, insightful or blatantly uninsightful.

Anyway.

Here is a communications truth — perception is not reality. The perception is that advertising makes shit up, makes stupid vapid shit and says nothing <as much as possible> and if they do say something it is a lie and, ultimately, they try and make people feel something <to sell>.

Nothing could be further from the truth <that is, of course, with the non hacks>.

The problem in advertising typically arises when the ad creators struggle to articulate the benefit <or convince themselves that it is ‘non differentiating’ and then seek to ‘differentiate’ in some form or fashion>. It then can unravel from there because the ‘go-to’ phrase at this point in time is ‘do something brave’ … or ‘entertaining’ or ‘edgy’ <notice nowhere in there is “smart, insightful, thoughtful, truth”>.

Sure.

Great advertising messaging always is, and will be, imbued with some sense of courage.

Why?

Because if you want to be distinct you will not please everyone.

Because if you want to tell the truth you will not please everyone.

The hack advertising people use the ‘do something brave’ phrase indiscriminately to justify bad advertising.

The good advertising people use this phrase to do something smart in order to not be different but stand ABOVE everyone else.

Yup.

Huge difference.

Hacks say ‘stand apart.’

Non hacks say ‘stand above.’

And this is where I imagine articles about advertising should focus their attention on. Why doesn’t the advertising stand above <and not be below what is good & right & untrue>.

Advertising should be smart and not talk down to people but actually enable them to rise up to the occasion … and FEEL like they are rising up to engage with that brand or company.

Communications should be truthful, regardless whether it is simple or complex, and enable people to be able to FEEL truth in such a way that doubts about that brand or company are swept away.

And it all has to be done with an eye toward ‘decommoditizing’ or being distinct in some meaningful way <because truth, in and of itself, is not a differentiator>.

Advertising cannot be dull and uninspired … and you cannot use a small budget as an excuse. In fact … the truth is that a limited budget is typically what drives innovative advertising.

Yup.

Inspired smart creativity tends to make each dollar be more effective <hence you can live with a smaller budget>.

In other words … a smart, insightful, relevant, entertaining ad will be more memorable than a typical ‘category using sacred cow imagery’ ad therefore it needs to be seen less for the same effect.

Oh.

And if you add in ‘truth’ <in a way in which you aren’t just communicating it but people actually BELIEVE it>, your communications is more memorable, more believable, can be seen less for the same effect … and is, of course, of higher value.

By the way … smart means not any obvious photoshopping or any exaggerated ridiculous claims or just plain inaccurate information or anything fluffed up or untrue.

By the way … smart means avoiding stereotypes, typecasting and idiotic generalizations and lies.

Note to advertising people:

We can see through those slimy tactics. Realize consumers are people … people who are smart and informed.

Make me aware of a product.

Educate me.

Relate to me.

Tell me the Truth.

Regardless.

===

“A dull truth will not be looked at. An exciting lie will.

That is what good, sincere people must understand. They must make their truth exciting and new, or their good works will be born dead.”

==

Bill Bernbach

——-

Truth is truth.

Lies are lies.

Responsibility is responsibility.

And if you do not accept your responsibility to tell the truth as excitingly and convincingly as you possibly can … lies will win.

If you choose to vulgarize the society or brutalize it … or even ignore it <all under the guise of ‘understanding what the consumer wants’> … society will lose.

I honestly do not despair when I look at business in today’s world … or even marketing & advertising behavior.

I get aggravated.

No.

I get angry.

I get angry that we are not accepting the responsibility.

I get angry that we are not strong enough to accept the burden.

I get angry that many do not even presume the responsibility is within their purview.

Business, whether you like it or not, shapes society. Business, whether you like it or not, shapes truth.

What we do matters.

Selling stuff doesn’t matter.

It only matters as a means to an end. What really matters is the shaping of attitudes <which ultimately shapes behavior>.

Far too often by simply focusing on ‘selling stuff’ the byproduct of our ignoring the larger responsibility is that we brutalizing society in some form or fashion – in this case and in this time and place … it would be truth we are brutalizing.

Am I suggesting that selling stuff or being profitable isn’t important? Of course not. All I am suggesting is that HOW you sell stuff and be profitable matters. And that you have a responsibility in HOW you do what you do.

Because HOW you do things impacts society. It shapes society. It can vulgarize or brutalize … or invigorate or instill good.

HOW you do things has a power way beyond simply you or what you do in that moment.

HOW you do things is a pebble dropping into a pond.

In the end.

I will not argue that all advertising is good.

I will not argue that all professional communications is good.

A lot of it is shit.

But I will argue that good communications & advertising people, not hacks, are smart and tend to create smart insightful educating communication pieces that avoid the trite and stereotyping imagery and focus on telling the truth, if not A real truth, rather than lie or some semi truth.

I would also argue that good communications & advertising people, not hacks, have the opportunity to save truth in today’s society.

Anyway.

I think many of the world’s institutions are embattled but the one that concerns me the most is Truth.

The institution of truth is under siege.

I can honestly say I don’t think most who are attacking truth are trying to facilitate its downfall … most are simply unclear what is truth and what is not. I believe anyone in any position of influence should be proactively assuming the burdensome responsibility of telling and protecting truth <that will come at an expense> but today … I think the professional communications industry should be at the forefront of the battle.

Why?

They get paid to communicate. If they cannot figure out how to effectively communicate truth, who can?

They must … must make their truth exciting and new, or their good works will be born dead. Uhm. And lies will win.

===

About the author:

I am a 50something who believes my generation hollowed out Truth by simplistically suggesting truth was best told through simplicity.

Truth is neither simple nor hollow.

I have had one framed picture in my office since maybe 2000: Seek Truth.

I recently discussed the Penalty of Leadership thought with a number of businesses … and at exactly the same time I have had several great discussions with some young employees.

It occurred to me that there is also a penalty of youth.

And when I thought about this it made me rethink something I wrote back in September 2012 about ‘the voices of a generation.’ In it I suggested that each generation will always have a ‘few’ to stand up and give voice to generation.

For most generations that may be true … but in this younger generation I believe I am wrung. I believe everyone in this younger generation will have to face the penalty of youth.

The penalty is that … well … there are so many absurd perceptions with regard to the younger generation that they have to address it. If they do not … well … then they pay a penalty in that perceptions drive older people’s behaviors toward them.

Do I believe every young generation has faced his penalty? Yes.

But I will suggest. and I believe, that this generation faces a stronger misperception battle from older people <the Last Generation> mostly because the older generations are facing so much uncertainty of their own they shift some of their angst over all the change to the future generations.

Now.

The biggest misperception absurdity is the proclaimed characteristics of “selfishness and entitlement.”

Shit.

We called the baby boomer generation the “Me Generation” and in 2013 Time magazine called the millennials the “Me Me Me Generation.”

From that point on Life has been a sonuvabitch to young people with regard to attitudes & perceptions … and words we say about them.

Look.

Words matter.

I have said that again and again and again.

And of all the words we flippantly throw around with regard to the young creates the insipid implication of a lack of depth and character tied to this “me-ness” they seem to own.

This is crazy.

Just nuts.

I could point out that we <I am a 50osomething> were bashed for our ‘me-ness’ … hands were wringing over our character challenges as well as our laziness.

But I will not.

Because today’s youth are not achievement-oriented robots, not single-mindedly focused on themselves … and not lazy, entitled, anti-capitalist morons simply pursuing passion and not hard work.

They are not immoral, selfish, cruel or even overly materialistic.

They are probably less bigoted, racist, and sexist than prior generations <which is far too often mischaracterized as ‘politically correct’>.

They are, research shows, in general, a nice combination of achievement desires, worldly aspirations with a strong desire to do good.

That said.

I, personally, have found most young people to be thoughtful, interesting, and stimulating.

=====

“Generation X.” Instead of being “slackers,” “judgmental,” and “anti-corporate,” he said, Millennials are “leaning forward,” “engaged,” “inclusive,” and “tolerant,” and they believe that “commerce” can be “lubricated by conscience.”

marketing expert Scott Hess

=====

All I wish is that … well … they were more articulate and outspoken in defending themselves against the tripe we older folk throw at them.

Yeah, here is the deal, while I will go anywhere at any time and expound upon the virtues of our future – the young – they have to step up and speak out.

That is inevitably their penalty … the one they have to pay.

They just can’t ignore it.

They just can’t say it is all stupid.

They can’t just say “they” don’t understand.

And they just can’t say it is ignorance <and suggest it is beneath you>.

Ultimately, the penalty of youth is … well … proof.

Well.

That sucks.

Who the hell wants to invest all that energy simply trying to debunk some stupid misperceptions?

<I will admit … certainly not me … and certainly not me when I was young>

But, whether embraced or not, it is the penalty of youth.

What I mean by that is … it is a penalty of responsibility … or penalty that costs you if you do not assume the responsibility.

Bottom line?

There is a penalty whether you accept it or not.

Now.

Many people <older ones> suggest our education system is at the root of young people not being able to stand their ground intelligently <if not intellectually>.

I do not.

Research actually shows it is not our education system but rather more what we older folk teach them growing up. Yeah. It seems that defending ourselves is not in our natural DNA. In fact … from our youngest age most of us are taught to … well … not defend ourselves.

Think about it.

As we grow up mostly we are taught to either:

Walk away <leave the situation>

Tell an adult

The challenge with both of these is that both of these are dependent upon an adult being available immediately to assess the situation and be the jury & judge. As a result most of us learn to be dependent upon an external authority to defend.

This also means we are not trained from day one to use words to deescalate & defend.

This ultimately can also translate into a weird ying & yang affect where bullies become masters of holding their own <through physical and nonphysical means> while others struggle to shed everything they learned about external authority to deal with bullies.

Suffice it to say we don’t really embed a good set of tools and sense of ‘how to’ stand up and speak out.

So while we ask for a generation which definitely has a backbone, has dedication and has tenacity … we adults don’t necessarily give them the tools with which to defend and articulate their backbone, dedication and tenacity.

And without those tools they just look stubborn, purposeless and unwilling to listen.

I am not sure what we adults do to create this following research factoid but research from Girl Scouts of America says kids say their confidence in speaking up and leading others dwindles by the fifth grade.

Kids also tell us they gain that confidence is by entering into activities, clubs, teambuilding, etc. and the earlier the better.

And while I could lazily suggest we just need to make sure the young have opportunities to be a member of a team, take charge of a project or lead others … I imagine what I wish is that we could teach, and encourage, a sense of … well … ‘grit.’ This is a little different than resiliency.

Grit is more about the blue collar aspects of living Life … the working, the keep pushing, the keep failing, and the learning to get back up again … all the while defending what you are doing.

We need to encourage the young to stand up for their views even if they may not be unpopular.

We need to encourage the young to know that even though they might feel uncomfortable they should always feel it’s best to stand up for your rights or the rights of others … and what is right.

We need to encourage them to be a model of assertive articulation in a respectful way.

I tend to believe when young people know their opinions count they are more likely to speak out and not only feel comfortable speaking up for themselves they learn thru trial & error how to best find their ‘voice.’

The more we ask them what they believe … and probe on why they believe it … the better they will be as people and the better they will be at articulating what their generation is going to offer us <that we older folk have clearly been unable to offer the world>.

We want the young to know that they should “look” confident, not angry or frustrated, in order to be taken seriously.

We want the young to know that holding on to ideals is good … but letting go of old ideas is the penalty of … well … growing up.

==========

Giving up something that no longer serves a purpose, or protects you, or helps you, isn’t giving up at all, it’s growing up.

–

Laurell K. Hamilton

==============

While it is trite to say the young are our future … the numbers actually bear it out this time. The sheer population of the young is quickly overreaching the population numbers of the old.

The youth actually owns the now & the next.

They ARE the dominant voice … and minds … of now and the next.

That said.

The penalty of youth is to use that voice … and use it wisely. They need to embrace … well … exactly what 30 Seconds said upfront:

…. the kings and queens of promise and, yet, the victims of ourselves

Embrace and understand that promise is achieved by not permitting themselves to be victims of themselves.

Oh.

And the responsibility of the older generation is to listen to that voice … and treat it wisely.

“Then I let the stories live inside my head, again and again until the real world fades back into cricket lullabies and my own dreams.”

=

Jacqueline Woodson

–

——

–

eternal-books:

EBOOKS ARE BOOKS.

AUDIO BOOKS ARE BOOKS.

PAPERBACKS ARE BOOKS.

HARDCOVERS ARE BOOKS.

BOOKS ARE GREAT.

DO I NEED TO REPEAT MYSELF??

–

—–

“Reading, which was in decline due to the growth of television, tripled from 1980 to 2008, because it is the overwhelmingly preferred way to receive words on the Internet.”

=

University of California at San Diego study

————————————

…. an axe to break the frozen sea within us.

Whew.

When I first read those words I thought … well … have there ever been better words to describe a book.

A confession.

I love about books & reading.

——–

I have always been a reader; I have read at every stage of my life and there has never been a time when reading was not my greatest joy.

And yet I cannot pretend that the reading I have done in my adult years matches in its impact on my soul the reading I did as a child.

=

The Thirteenth Tale” by Diane Setterfield

——

Clearly. I am a book reader.

Well.

No.

I am a book lover.

I love the words.

I love the thoughts they create.

I love the paper stock and how it feels on the fingertips.

I love a good book cover.

I love BIG books.

==

“I’m a big believer in big books, and that doesn’t necessarily mean long books.”

–

Mark Z Danielewski

==

So I imagine when I write about books it has to encompass the books themselves and reading books and even collecting books on a shelf.

Look.

I understand.

To some … reading is pleasure.

To some … reading is pain.

To some … yesterday’s generation was born with their nose in a book <and therefore better thinkers and speakers and literate than today’s generation>.

To some … today’s generation is … well … none of the thinkers, speakers, or even ‘literate’ as listed above … because they don’t read enough.

All that said … to everyone … reading is reading …and every generation has readers and nonreaders.

And while I love a paper book … I think it’s silly to judge e-book readers as anything but … well … book readers & lovers.

A book is a book.

Reading is reading.

Words, well written, are well written words.

——–

“He reached out to stroke the spines of the books, as if they might whisper their secrets to him if he touched them.

But the books remained silent, as all good books tend to do when touched by people to whom they don’t belong.”

=

Christoph Marzi Heaven

——–

And while all readers have special books, the ones that whisper their secrets to us, I will be honest … I have never met a book that didn’t ‘belong’ to me.

They all whisper to me.

But I also understand that books mean different things to different people. Even between readers. One of my favorite tumblr blogs shared this break down of reader segments.

—-

Different Kinds of Readers

<from a-thousand-words blog>

–

– The Devourer:

Each book is a snack for this kind of reader–but it doesn’t mean that s/he won’t enjoy each book just as much.

– The Lover:

Books read by this kind of reader are read in hidden, stolen moments at the most unexpected times.

– The Slow Dancer:

Books are a treat that this kind of reader savors. Slow and steady wins this reader’s race, as his/her eyes take in and taste each and every word.

– The Addict:

Books are a conquest to this kind of reader. S/he will buy more books than s/he can read, but s/he will ALWAYS have something to read.

– The Classic:

Books of the past are a gift to this reader. Prose in the style of early contemporary authors, or stories written long ago, are favorites for this reader.

– The Die-Hard:

Genres are a way of life for this reader. S/he finds a niche and sticks to it–veering from what s/he knows for short bursts of time.

– The Advocate:

This reader is a lover of books. S/he is not just a reader, but an advocate of reading–hoping that the future will contain more readers.

—-

Readers and reading always revolves around the following discussion.

We read for three purposes … information, understanding and entertainment <some reading research expert wrote this>.

And reading in today’s world is not about attention loss in the wake of technological gain <I do get so tired of old people’s lamenting about the Internet’s effects on our brains despite all the research to the contrary>:

———

“It’s not reasonable to think of technology — in the usual vaguely pejorative meaning of that term — as the enemy of reading.”

=

Alan Jacobs professor of English

——-

To be clear.

Technology is not the enemy of reading. Technology has simply enabled a different source for reading.

And while reading is, and will always be, a work in progress … reading hasn’t lost the interest of those who care.

And every generation will have those who care about reading … and those who will not.

Today’s world is not a regression of anything that once was … it is simply a progression of what is.

Anyway.

Maybe because it is because giving a Kindle <or Nook> seems like the must thing to do these days.

Maybe it is because I just saw a study on book ownership & literacy.

Maybe because I tend to think reading <anything … not just books> is critical to fighting ignorance.

Maybe because of all that I am taking a moment to talk about children’s literacy and what is happening with books <and reading>.

Maybe because of all of that I want to share something written by a teenager:

——

A major source of confusion is the fact that information from reputable sources is increasingly available on the Internet, which is far more convenient to use than hauling your ass to a library, browsing through the book collection, finding a giant tome, browsing through it to find what you need, and then rinse and repeat.

We’re keeping up with the modern world. And we’re definitely reading. We’re just not reading on physical paper, which is apparently a crime against humanity or something.

Hell, we’re reading plenty of things on physical paper too. Just not what we “should” be reading according to these “Damned-Whippersnappers”-crying adults. We’re reading not only fiction and fantasy (Harry Potter, Hunger Games, etc.), but also memoirs (The Glass Castle and Night) and many other genres.

We’re reading, just not what and how you think we should.

—–

I include this because I see a boatload of research floating around the internet that suggests there is a concerning negative trend with regard to reading.

There was one study that said almost 4 million children in Britain – one in three – do not own a book <and 12% have never been to a bookshop> and that the findings were very worrying because book ownership was linked to children’s future success in life.

I imagine I take a pause in reading this because it is tied so closely to books and book ownership. And I think that direct correlation or link suggests the wrong conclusion.

What do I mean? Young people are reading … maybe just not what or how we old folk want them to.

What they do is read a lot … of what they want to read a lot of.

And that leads me to … uhm … pleasure.

People do things that they find pleasure in doing.

There are a gazillion reasons that reading can matter but suffice it to say most of them are ‘do it because it is good for you’ type arguments.

And, by the way, that crap doesn’t persuade more young people to read for fun.

Fun just cannot be positioned as a duty or responsibility. Fun is … well … fun.

Fun as in a pleasurable and personal choice.

Therefore persuasion to read doesn’t really exist … it is the temptation … and inevitably reading because they want to … not because they have to.

Ok.

Back to facts <and this fun thing>.

Children are reading from books and even computers less, but watching films and images on screens more.

Ok.

The act of picking up a book may be in decline but the unquenchable thirst for knowledge is not lost.

Let’s just say the tap has changed into a water bottle.

Looking at an old Wall Street Journal I read the following by Ann Patchett:

I am a firm believer in the fact that it isn’t so much what you read that counts, it’s that you read … I’m all for reading bad books because I consider them to be a gateway drug.

People who read bad books now may or may not read better books in the future. People who read nothing now will read nothing in the future.

Ann is correct.

Reading matters.

Any reading matters.

Remember when comics were the evil empire against ‘real’ literature?

Well.

This leads me to another piece of research <which does suggest we need young people to read more of useful type stuff>.

U.S. students missed large numbers of words they were expected to know on a new vocabulary section of a national exam <this is considered evidence of severe shortcomings in the nation’s reading education>.

The results showed that nearly half of eighth-graders didn’t know that “permeates” means to “spread all the way through,” and about the same proportion of fourth-graders didn’t know that “puzzled” means confused—words that educators think students in those grades should recognize.

Most fourth-graders did know the meaning of “created,” “spread” and “underestimate.” At eighth grade, most students knew “grimace,” “icons” and “edible.”

This all leads me to suggest we need some fresh approaches to encourage young people to read more. Fortunately for me … smarter minds than I have noodled this question & issue.

Reluctant readers, to me, are those who haven’t found the right book at the right time yet. YALSA’s Quick Picks for Reluctant Readers list is a great source for finding books for these teens.

It’s important to encourage teens to read something that interests them, in any format that’s available — find out what a teen is passionate about and how he or she likes to read.

What doesn’t really matter is how people choose to read…what matters is that people still choose to read … the choice of how they do it, paper or plastic or digital, does not matter.

Conventional wisdom holds that YouTube, videogames, cable TV and iPods have turned us away from written words.

A large-scale study by the University of California at San Diego and other research universities revealed what some of us have long suspected: We’re reading far more words than we used to as we adopt new technologies.

Just look at Facebook and you can see that we’re almost certainly writing more than we used to.

If you’re reading thousands of words a day on a variety of devices, paper included, you need as much help as you can get in deciding which words to read.

Ironically, the same technologies derided by some for contributing to a lack of literacy — Facebook and Twitter — are full of recommendations of things to read.

Technology has actually made reading and writing even more essential parts of everyday life.

Social mores surrounding the act of reading alone in public may be changing along with increased popularity.

Suddenly, the lone, unapproachable reader at the corner table seems less alone.

Given that some e-readers can display books while connecting online, there’s a chance the erstwhile bookworm is already plugged into a conversation somewhere,

For many, e-readers are today’s must-have accessory, eroding old notions of what being bookish might have meant.

“Buying literature has become cool again.”

Ah.

And then there is this one bonehead … Jonathan Franzen … and his fear that ebooks will have a detrimental effect on the world – and his belief that serious readers will always prefer print editions.

This guy is … well … nuts.

Serious readers read. That would be a definition of a serious reader.

The vehicle in which the words appear before a reader is irrelevant.

He argues that for serious readers “a sense of permanence has always been part of the experience”:

“Everything else in your life is fluid, but here is this text that doesn’t change.

Will there still be readers 50 years from now who feel that way? Who have that hunger for something permanent and unalterable?

I don’t have a crystal ball.

But I do fear that it’s going to be very hard to make the world work if there’s no permanence like that. That kind of radical contingency is not compatible with a system of justice or responsible self-government.”

This kook also said: “it’s doubtful that anyone with an internet connection at his workplace is writing good fiction.”

<insert: “what a stupid fuck” here from me>

Ok.

That is crazy.

Those words are nuts.

And, in fact, slightly silly <although, scarily, the words are coming from what some in today’s world consider a ‘real thinker’>.

Real things will always exist.

Real writers will always exist (and will either embrace the fragmentation or will simply be one f thise who can tune it out).

Real readers will always exist <and read whatever is put in front of them in whatever form it appears in … as long as it is worth reading>.

This guy associated the internet, and computer, as impermanence.

“Someone worked really hard to make the language just right, just the way they wanted it. They were so sure of it that they printed it in ink, on paper.

A screen always feels like we could delete that, change that, move it around. So for a literature-crazed person like me, it’s just not permanent enough.”

And, frankly, this type of drivel drives me nuts … and drives young people nuts.

According to the most recent survey by the National Endowment for the Arts, the proportion of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 who read a book not required at school or at work is now 50.7%, the lowest for any adult age group younger than 75, and down from 59% 20 years ago.

Back in 2004, when the NEA last looked at younger readers’ habits, it was already the case that fewer than one in three 13-year-olds read for pleasure every day.

The only thing that really concerns me is that the fact that 2/3rd of college freshmen read for pleasure for less than an hour per week.

And a third of seniors don’t read for pleasure at all.

And the number of 17-year-olds who never read for pleasure increased to 19% in 2004 from 9% in 1984.

And almost half of Americans between ages 18 and 24 never read books for fun.

It this ‘lack of pleasure’ concerns me because I believe books are to be enjoyed.

Shit.

I believe words are to be enjoyed.

I cannot fathom anyone not appreciating ‘good words.’ While I am most likely naïve on this issue … I tend to believe those who find reading painful just have not found words that give pleasure. And they are out there yet to be found if only they would seek <or someone would put them in front of them>.

A person with no books … well … as one storyteller said … “a person with no books is inconsequential in today’s world. But. Without books how can we identify the inconsequential from the meaningful?”

Anyway.

What is a book?

It is an axe to break the frozen sea within us.

It is an agent of change.

—–

One must always be careful of books,” said Tessa, “and what is inside them, for words have the power to change us.”

Cassandra Clare

——

What is a book?

Well.

I will dispense with all the descriptors and pompous standpoints and simply suggest … a book is simply something consequential.

“You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view … Until you climb inside of his skin and walk around in it.”

=

Harper Lee

——————–

“I think an author should write what the reader does not expect. The problem is not to ask what they need, but to change them … to produce the kind of reader you want for each story.”

=

Umberto Eco

——

Within 24 hours two authors, whose books are a must have on any decent book shelf, died. With their passing I ended up taking the their two most must have books, To Kill a Mockingbird and Foucault’s Pendulum, off my own shelf to reread for the umpteenth time.

Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird is my favorite book of all time and the one that most likely set me on the path mentally on ‘doing what is right despite the odds.’

Umberto Eco’s Foucault’s Pendulum <which I loved much more than In the Name of the Rose> was one of my first, and favorite, intellectual mind bending books.

As Lee suggested you never really understand a person until you climb into his skin and walk around in it. Both of these authors seemed to weave characters in which you walked around in justice, truth, fear, wisdom, decency, bravery, cowardice, empathy and whatever human characteristic each of us have faced … sometimes well and sometimes not so well.

And both taught us respect for hope in what resides within us to be our best, and worst, and still find that … well … we still are standing at the end.

I would like to believe both authors will not be remembered for their complications, but for the simplicity they offered us in the big choices in Life.

Do the right thing or do the wrong thing.

While one walked us thru the path as moral beings the other tended to walk us thru that path intellectually.

And that is why both of their books reside on my shelf.

They remind me that we will face so many big choices in Life and there is no formula for making the right & good choice … you can face them intellectually or morally or in any combination you would like. But in the end you make a choice.

===

“I wanted you to see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand.

It’s when you know you’re licked before you begin, but you begin anyway and see it through no matter what.”

Harper Lee

===

They may have stopped breathing but their books are immortal. And their books will not only continue to take our breath away each time we read them but give us new air to breathe.

==

“Until I feared I would lose it, I never loved to read. One does not love breathing.”

“A wrong turn lead me to a field of flowers and suddenly I’m second guessing every wrong turn in my life.”

———

Source: a thousand words tumblr

===

Well.

I have never analyzed nor have I seen any research with regard to how much time we use to plan out the ‘right moves’ to make in our careers and lives. I imagine, if a study were done, between consciously planning and the ‘in the moment analysis’ planning … those two ‘life plannings’ would represent some inordinately absurd amount of our time.

When I saw this thought on athousandwords I began thinking about how often most of us attach ‘bad’ to wrong turns and how less often we attach ‘good’ to wrong turns.

Simplistically we attach wrong to bad.

Wrong turn = Bad choice/decision

Sure.

Sometimes that is true.

But I think I could argue that a wrong turn simply puts you in some place you hadn’t planned on <and you assume the plan was a good plan because … well … you had planned it>. Therefore the unplanned place is a bad place because it … well … was an unplanned place <some circular logic which seems kind of doomed to conclude bad even if it may actually be good>.

Setting aside the whole planning thing … turns are part of life.

Life is not one huge straight boulevard you place your car on and start driving.

Life is more often like seemingly random patchwork of inner city streets with dead ends, one ways and no left hand turns which seemingly are only placed at only the intersections which you had planned to make a left hand turn.
Whether you plan the shit out of your life or not we all make a shitload of turns in Life.

Some are planned.

Some are unplanned.

Some you have the time to invest a lot of time thinking about.

Some you cannot invest a lot of time thinking about.

Some end up in a good place.

Some end up in a bad place.

I imagine my only point is that sometimes, maybe more often than you think, a wrong turn puts you in a different better more interesting place. A wrong turn exposes you to something you maybe never imagined you would ever see, ever face or ever think about. And that is the ultimate value of a wrong turn.

It exposes you to something beyond the plan you ever envisioned.

I don’t propose building a Life around a disproportionate amount of purposeful wrong turning.

That kind of seems a little chaotic and absolutely suggests a shitload of wasted time & energy.

However.

Maybe we think about Life more as a shitload of turns … just a blanket ‘shitload’ … instead of categorizing them simply as right turns & wrong turns.

Turns are turns and more often than not they don’t lead you some place you can never leave they simply lead you to some place.